Wakilii

Excel Construction Ltd v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 3 of 2007)

High Court · [2013] UGCOMMC 23 · 2013 Judgment for Plaintiff (Interest Matter Referred) AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for recovery of outstanding certified payments and interest arising from a construction contract
Decision
Plaintiff awarded contractual interest to be calculated by official referee appointed by the registrar; general damages claim dismissed; costs to the plaintiff

Observed later treatment

Treatment recorded in citing cases distinguished in 1 Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

Good law Followed in 0 cases and applied in 0 cases, with no adverse treatment recorded. Citations rising — 3 citing cases on record, 3 in the most recent three data years. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

Held that contractual interest at commercial borrowing rates is payable on delayed payments under clause 43.1 from 28 days after certificate issuance until payment, calculated on principal only, not compounded. General damages for breach are disallowed where the contract stipulates liquidated damages through interest for late payment; a plaintiff cannot recover more than the agreed contractual remedy. The matter of outstanding interest is referred to an official referee for calculation. Costs awarded to the plaintiff.

Outcome

Plaintiff awarded contractual interest to be calculated by official referee appointed by the registrar; general damages claim dismissed; costs to the plaintiff

Facts

Excel Construction Ltd entered into Construction Contract No. MoH/KK/02 lot 3 with the Ministry of Health. The plaintiff completed the work but the defendant failed to pay outstanding certified payments within the contractual time frame of 28 days after certificate issuance. The plaintiff sued for recovery of UGX 1,604,009,782 being outstanding certified payments and accumulated interest. During mediation in March 2008, the defendant admitted owing UGX 1,821,399,303.67. The defendant paid UGX 1,200,000,000 in April 2009. Subsequently, after adjustments, the defendant admitted owing a balance of UGX 452,452,349.70, for which judgment on admission was entered in April 2011. That amount was paid in June 2011. The plaintiff claimed additional interest on late payments and general damages for breach of contract.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to interest on account of late payments.
  2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an award of general damages for breach of contract.
  3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an award of costs.

Orders

  • The plaintiff is awarded any outstanding sums calculated by the official referee to be appointed by the registrar following the guidelines in this judgment.
  • Where an outstanding principal amount is established up to the date of judgment, interest shall continue on the outstanding principal amount from the date of judgment at commercial borrowing rates till payment in full as stipulated in clause 43.1 of the contract between the parties.
  • The plaintiff is not entitled to general damages on the basis of delay in payment as delays are compensated by an award of interest at commercial borrowing rates per annum with effect from 28 days after due date of payment until the next payment.
  • The plaintiff is awarded costs of the suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Construction Contracts — Interpretation of Contractual Interest Clauses
Where a construction contract provides that interest on late payment shall be calculated from the date payment should have been made up to the date when late payment is made at the prevailing rate for commercial borrowing, such interest is calculated separately for each certificate from 28 days after issuance until actual payment, and is payable on the principal amount only, not on accumulated interest.
Contract Law — Liquidated Damages — Exclusion of Additional Damages for Breach
Where parties have agreed in a written contract to a specific remedy for delay in payment in the form of interest at commercial borrowing rates, that contractual remedy represents liquidated damages and the plaintiff cannot recover additional general damages for the same breach; the plaintiff is limited to the agreed contractual remedy.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Bar on Departure Without Amendment
A party cannot depart from its pleadings without amendment under Order 6 rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Rules; pleadings operate as notice to the opposing party and the court, and constitute the facts which the plaintiff must prove for judgment to be passed in its favour.
Civil Procedure — Reference to Official Referee — Complex Accounting Matters
Under section 27(c) of the Judicature Act, the court may refer questions requiring detailed accounting calculations to an official referee appointed by the registrar, particularly where the determination involves applying contractual interest formulas across multiple payment certificates and partial payments over an extended period.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (12)

  • Stanbic Bank (U) Ltd v Atyaba Agencies Ltd (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 235 of 2006)
  • Harbutt's Plasticide Ltd vs. Wayne Tank & Pump Co. Ltd 1 All ER 849
  • Kazinga Channel Office World Ltd v Attorney General (High Court Civil Suit No. 276 of 2005)
  • Kituni Construction Ltd v Julius Okeny (High Court Civil Suit No. 250 of 2004)
  • Hajj Asuman Mutekanga v Equator Growers (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 7 of 1995)
  • Monarch SS Company versus Karlshanus Oliefabriker (1949) AC 196 at 221
  • Prehn versus Royal Bank of Liverpool (1870) LR 5 EX 92 at page 99 - 100
  • Mukisa Biscuit Manufacturing Company Ltd versus West End Distributors Ltd [1970] EA 469 at 475
  • Trans Trust S P R L v Danubian Trading Co Ltd [1952] 1 All ER 970
  • Suisse Atlantique Société D'armement Maritime S A v N V Rotterdamsche Kolen Centrale [1966] 2 All ER 61
  • Francis Butagira vs. Deborah Namukasa (1992 - 1993) HCB 98
  • London, Chatham & Dover Ry Co v South Eastern Ry Co

Cases citing this judgment (3)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Excel Construction Ltd v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 3 of 2007) [2013] UGCommC 23 (15 February 2013)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.